The Supreme Court has stated that failure to provide the detainee with the documents they sought or failure to provide copies of the documents that the detaining authority relied upon when obtaining the detention order constitutes a violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution. The detainee is granted two rights under Article 22(5): first, the right to be informed of the reasons why the order of custody has been made, and second, the right to be given the earliest opportunity to object to the order of detention.
The right to personal liberty and individual freedom is the most prized and cannot be taken away in any situation, not even temporarily, according to a bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar.
It is well established that the right to make a representation implies that the detainee should have all the information that will enable him to make an effective representationthe Bench stated.
No doubt, this right is again subject to the right or privilege given by clause (6). At the same time, refusal to supply the documents requested by the detenu or supply of illegible or blurred copies of the documents relied upon by the detaining authority amounts to a violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
Although it is true that whether an opportunity has been afforded to make an effective representation always depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.a bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar said.
The judgement to set aside the detention order issued under the 1988 Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act was appealed, and the court’s ruling was made in response. The HC revoked the custody order on the grounds that the detainee had not been given legible copies of the documents that the detaining authority had referred to while making the detention order.